MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394729330 · doi:10.1109/mts.2024.3375996

Introducing the Editorial Board—Part I

2024· article· en· W4394729330 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Technology and Society Magazine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsProfessional Engineers OntarioCarleton UniversityUniversity of WaterlooConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEditorial boardMedicineGeneral surgeryLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Publications are only as strong as the people who make them work. As part of this new chapter in IEEE Technology and Society Magazine (TSM), this is the first in a series of pieces to introduce the new associate editors who represent a powerhouse of knowledge on the social implications of technology and are leaders from across the many varied disciplines that the IEEE Society for the Social Implications of Technology (IEEE SSIT) encompasses. We hope the answers below highlight the ways in which the associate editors are both scholars and engaged citizens whose work aims to make positive change as it addresses (or transforms) harms related to social–technical relationships. Reading through the answers from the associate editors’ work and interests, what becomes clear is that seriously engaging with technology and society concepts leads to richer research projects and more meaningful ways in which to address technological and social problems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it